in vs. const

2009-03-07 Thread dsimcha
All the discussion about const on this NG lately has made me realize that I have no idea what the difference is between const and in, i.e. what is the difference between: SomeType foo(const SomeType bar) and SomeType foo(in SomeType bar) ?

Re: in vs. const

2009-03-07 Thread Sean Kelly
dsimcha wrote: All the discussion about const on this NG lately has made me realize that I have no idea what the difference is between const and in, i.e. what is the difference between: SomeType foo(const SomeType bar) and SomeType foo(in SomeType bar) There's no difference between them. The

Re: in vs. const

2009-03-07 Thread Adam Burton
Sean Kelly wrote: > dsimcha wrote: >> All the discussion about const on this NG lately has made me realize that >> I have no idea what the difference is between const and in, i.e. what is >> the difference between: >> >> SomeType foo(const SomeType bar) and >> SomeType foo(in SomeType bar) > > T

Re: in vs. const

2009-03-07 Thread Sergey Gromov
Sat, 7 Mar 2009 15:37:07 + (UTC), dsimcha wrote: > All the discussion about const on this NG lately has made me realize that I > have no idea what the difference is between const and in, i.e. what is the > difference between: > > SomeType foo(const SomeType bar) and > SomeType foo(in SomeType

Re: in vs. const

2009-03-07 Thread Robert Fraser
Adam Burton wrote: Sean Kelly wrote: dsimcha wrote: All the discussion about const on this NG lately has made me realize that I have no idea what the difference is between const and in, i.e. what is the difference between: SomeType foo(const SomeType bar) and SomeType foo(in SomeType bar) Th

Re: in vs. const

2009-03-08 Thread Sergey Gromov
Sat, 07 Mar 2009 17:43:19 -0800, Robert Fraser wrote: > Adam Burton wrote: >> Sean Kelly wrote: >> >>> dsimcha wrote: All the discussion about const on this NG lately has made me realize that I have no idea what the difference is between const and in, i.e. what is the difference be

Re: in vs. const

2009-03-09 Thread Kagamin
Sergey Gromov Wrote: > In D2, 'in' means 'const scope'. I've seen that in writing but can't > remember where. How can it be scope? If you have scope object, it gets *destructed* when leaving scope: when function exits. Ouch.

Re: in vs. const

2009-03-09 Thread Denis Koroskin
On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:07:05 +0300, Kagamin wrote: Sergey Gromov Wrote: In D2, 'in' means 'const scope'. I've seen that in writing but can't remember where. How can it be scope? If you have scope object, it gets *destructed* when leaving scope: when function exits. Ouch. No. Scope has

Re: in vs. const

2009-03-09 Thread Kagamin
Denis Koroskin Wrote: > No. Scope has different meaning here. O RLY? That's good news.